Pages

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Rita Astuti - Some after dinner thoughts on Theory of Mind

This very cool essay is actually the transcript of an after-dinner talk given by Rita Astuti at Stanford University in September 2011 at a conference organized by Tanya Luhrmann entitled "Towards an anthropological Theory of Mind." The transcript was published in January, 2012 (#3), issue of Anthropology of this Century.

Theory of Mind (ToM) is one of the cool topics in philosophy, and even neuroscience, but where it has been most relevant for me is in developmental research. It seems that somewhere around 30-48 months, children begin to understand that what they are thinking/feeling/wanting may not be what another person (mom/dad) is thinking/feeling/wanting.

Developmentally, ToM is important because it is a necessary (but not sufficient) skill for the emergence of empathy (although Alison Gopnik and others have posited a primitive form of empathy even in infants). On the other hand, adults do not always act in accordance with ToM's attributional framework.

[Editor's note: This is, literally, the transcript of an after
dinner talk given by Rita Astuti on the occasion of a conference held at
Stanford University in September 2011. The conference, organised by
Tanya Luhrmann, was entitled "Towards an anthropological Theory of
Mind". For readers unfamiliar with the relevant debates in psychology
and philosophy, it will help to know - at least roughly - what “Theory
of Mind” refers to. To put it simply: “Theory of Mind” is the human
ability to attribute mental states to oneself and to other people (this
is one reason it has been called a theory: because it is about
phenomena that are not directly observable). We use Theory of Mind to
attribute knowledge and ignorance, emotions and thoughts, intentions and
desire to others, and to predict and explain their behaviour (this is
the second reason it has been called a theory: because it is
used to make predictions). The awareness that other people may have
false beliefs about the world has been regarded as the ultimate proof
that one has Theory of Mind. Whether this awareness is something we are
born with or something that emerges in the course of cognitive
development is a hotly debated issue. In the literature, Theory of Mind
is often abbreviated as ToM.]

The only other time I’ve been at a conference with a scheduled after
dinner talk was a few years ago at Trinity College, Cambridge. The
conference was on belief, and it had been funded by the Perrott-Warrick
Fund, a Fund set up in the 1930s to scientifically prove the existence
of the paranormal and the afterlife.

Although this unusual source of funding did not appear to affect the
proceedings during the day, by the time darkness fell magic was allowed
to take over. At dinner, we were treated to a magic show, delivered by a
professional magician who was also a professionally trained
psychologist. He first enchanted us with his tricks, and then revealed
the psychological principles underlying them – basically, he made us
aware of how he had manipulated our minds to make the magic work.

For example, he performed a simple – and yet so seductive –
disappearing trick, and we all fell for it. Then he explained that,
apart from the undeniable dexterity of his fingers, the magic worked
because of our – the audience’s – mind reading abilities.

He counted on the fact that if he intently looked OVER HERE, at his
left hand, the audience would FOLLOW HIS GAZE and concentrate on what he
was looking at. And while we were focusing on his left hand, the real
trick was happening OVER THERE, in his right hand – but nobody noticed.

Of course, the reason I’m telling you this story – which I chose to do before realizing that Graham Jones was going to be here[1]
– is that gaze following is one of the basic components of our mind
reading abilities: a building block of Theory of Mind, the topic of this conference.

You follow my gaze because you want to know what I’m seeing (you know
that looking is seeing) and what state of knowledge or ignorance I’m in
(you know that seeing is knowing).

By following each other’s gaze, we can coordinate our focus of
attention (we can both see and know the same thing) and monitor whether
we are paying attention to each other – for example, monitoring where
you are looking at is a pretty good way of finding out whether you are
following what I’m saying or whether you are bored or distracted;
although of course, like the magician, you can easily deceive me by
pretending to focus your attention on me while thinking about something
else…

In saying all of this, I might be taking a big gamble – I’m assuming
that you have a mind! This assumption, and what follows from it – that
you have knowledge, desires, intentions, emotions, beliefs and that it
is your knowledge, desires, intentions, emotions and beliefs that
explain your actions or lack thereof – is what Theory of Mind is all
about.